RESOLVED: Publish the new draft of PRD as a Last Call WD, after csma changes simple actions to actions, corrects a few typos, and pending Adrian's positive review by 6am ET Thursday. (Others are also free to object by that time, as well.)

RESOLVED: We clarify that relative IRIs are allowed in RIF syntaxes (anywhere IRIs are allowed, including Const rif:iri, symbol spaces, location, and profile), and that xml:base is used in making them absolute; the absolute form is seen and used internally, so that's the lexical space.

RESOLVED: Publish BLD as a second Last Call, pending axel review that his request have been implemented.

RESOLVED: Publish DTB as last call. draft, pending completion of all DTB actions.

RESOLVED: rdf:text will be marked at risk in DTB

RESOLVED: The LC drafts will have the 'flat' schemas, with an editors note saying we expect to refactor the schemas in the future (to use "include"), but do not expect to change which XML instance documents will be valid.

RESOLVED: add append as a new list-builtin and remove ceiling of list indexes.

RESOLVED: following editor's note in Core 6.1, all of the binding patterns with "u" for the equality predicates will be removed. (this leaves only pred:iri-string and pred:list-contains as (b, u))

RESOLVED: Close issue-39, saying ruleset-imports is in Core, and we're not going to define an "includes" at this time (in part because we don't know what it might mean). 'Imports' ends up in PRD, where it's not ideal, but not really harmful. Some version of PRD may do a more sophisticated import at some point.

RESOLVED: PRD will not address interop with RDF and OWL directly -- there is no work to do there. SWC will instead be updated to be phrased in terms of [safe] Core, so it can be (in most ways) inherited for PRD.

RESOLVED: Close issue-82, given understandings in discussion so far today. Core as specialization of PRD is just work to do. Yes, safeness restriction will resolve backward chaining problem (action on Jos). Does Core compatibility with RDF+OWL extend to PRD? only to the extend that's automatic through Core.

RESOLVED: Close issue-48. membership (#) in Core facts and conditions. subclass (##) not in Core.

RESOLVED: close issue-68 with no Named-Argument Uniterms (NAU) in Core or PRD.

RESOLVED: Close issue-72 saying "No" (Option D). (Nothing like skolem functions in Core.) We regret we were unable to find a good design to address this need.

RESOLVED: Close issue-33 with the understand that our mechanisms for accessing RDF and XML data sources, and using externals, will be sufficient.

RESOLVED: Close issue-78. The only Externals in BLD (and Core, and PRD) will be Predicates and Functions. No external frames, no external equality, etc.

RESOLVED: Close issue-69; there will be a Core schema, included in BLD and PRD schemas. see ACTION-692.

RESOLVED: Close issue-46; no decision to make at this time. If someone produces a proposal for modules, we may consider it.

RESOLVED: Add xsd:nonNegativeInteger, xsd:anyURI, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary to RIF Core. In RIF, the xsd numeric types will have disjoint value spaces (as in XSD1.1, unlike current OWL 2 drafts)-- we'll push for OWL to change and assume they will. [The owl:* types will be decided separately. Value spaces of Binaries will be decided separately. When those are decided, it will close issue-81].

RESOLVED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79 and the membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80.

RESOLVED: Replace in UCR the requirement on Rule language coverage by the following statement: Because of the great diversity of rule languages, no one interchange language is likely to be able to bridge between all. Instead, RIF provides dialects which are each targeted at a cluster of similar rule languages. RIF must allow intra-dialect interoperation, i.e. interoperability between semantically similar rule languages (via interchange of RIF rules) within one dialect, and it should support inter-dialect interoperation, i.e. interoperation between dialects with maximum overlap.

RESOLVED: In RIF-PRD, the conflict resolution strategy for a set of rules will be indicated in some way, associated with the top-level group. RIF-PRD 1.0 will specify only one normative conflict resolution strategy, as specified in csma's email [9] (essentially: refraction+priority+recency).

RESOLVED: RIF-PRD 1.0 MAY specify other conflict resolution strategies for suggested use, but these will not be mandatory.

RESOLVED: Add "New" construct with Gary's proposed semantics to represent the creation of new frame objects in then-part of PRD rules; not excluding extending it later with the use of constructors once we resolve how to call "methods".

RESOLVED: Add a construct with Gary's proposed semantics to represent the declaration of local variables for binding to New frames in the then-part of PRD rules ; not excluding that later resolutions might extend the use of local variables in the action part.

RESOLVED: Extend "Retract" construct with Gary's semantics to represent the removal of a frame object in then-part of PRD rules, that is, to represent the removal of an object from the instances of its class as well as all the frames with that object in the object position.

RESOLVED: Each RIF test case MUST, eventually, be provided in RIF XML, and MAY be provided in some syntax for which a translator-to-XML has been promised. The translator SHOULD be available for use by the WG to check the translation.

RESOLVED: change text of 5.1.3 to: It must be possible to create new RIF dialects which extend existing dialects (thus providing backward compatibility) and are handled gracefully by systems which support existing dialects (thus providing forward compatibility).

RESOLVED: For this next draft of UCR, add an editor's note to 5.1.6 to note that we're still working on how to define a coverage requirement. (unless we come up with some consensus text before publication)

RESOLVED: rephrase 5.2.1 to: The RIF specifications must provide clear conformance criteria, defining what is or is not a conformant RIF implementation.

RESOLVED: to close ISSUE-52 per the current version of BLD and SWC drafts, with the understanding that ISSUE-33 and ISSUE-39, and the new issue to be raised about profile mixing, are moved out of BLD critical path as a consequence.

RESOLVED: (on Axel's point 4) go with Prefix as Axel proposes (whitespace between prefix name and uri), as long as in the presentation syntax it is in a pre-amble, as a directive, so it is not easily confused with a fact.

RESOLVED: Create a new Document with provisional title "Data Types and Builtins" to contain elements common to all dialects with Harold and Axel as editors.

RESOLVED (REPEALED on 8 Apr): make "specialization of FLD" sections (of BLD) appendices, leaving standalone sections in place, and making both standalone and specialization normative.

RESOLVED: make argument names distinct.

RESOLVED: We keep named arguments, explaining in BLD that: A RIF consumer that does not support named arguments can implement them, with relative ease, by treating them as positional arguments (of a different predicate, formed in a stable but implementation-dependent way) in the lexical order of the argument names. (Closing ISSUE-44).

RESOLVED: No reification in BLD. This is like WD1, except no nested frames. A change from 18-Feb draft: Equality, frames, subclass, membership are no longer terms.

RESOLVED: (Approach 3) Functions on error return an error element that is in the domain. BLD Spec does not require that predicates return F on error, just that they have a truth value. BLD spec recommends using guards with builtins, to give predictability. Without guards, rules may behave unpredictability on error.

RESOLVED: Close Issue-43 by including in BLD subclass formulae of the form a ## b. In the RDF compatibility document, ## and rdfs:subClassOf will be connected appropriately, i.e. whenever a ## b holds, a rdfs:subClassOf b is required to hold.

RESOLVED: Close Issue-41 by including in BLD membership formulae of the form c # a. In the RDF compatibility document, # and rdf:type will be connected appropriately, i.e. a # b holds iff a rdf:type b holds.

RESOLVED: We'll refer to XSD 1.0 instead of XSD 1.1 in our document for now, including a clear note that it our intention to change to XSD 1.1 when it becomes available, so that people can use XML 1.1.

RESOLVED: All official (ie standard) dialects will use the main RIF namespace. We will support user extensions using other namespaces.

RESOLVED: WG asks for 6 months extension. Plans to get BLD to Last Call and hold 2 more F2F meetings by end of May.

RESOLVED: Core will be what is currently called BLD with Equality removed, function terms removed, and perhaps safeness, and perhaps slotted terms. We will not get rid of BLD. (Ignoring editorial issues for now) Frames stay in core.

RESOLVED: CLOSE ISSUE 25. Addressed by SWC document.

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-27 with the understanding that neither RIF Core nor RIF BLD will have constraint logic programming.

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-28 with the understanding that RIF Core (as defined earlier today) does not have the problems which caused us to raise this issue.

RESOLVED: to close ISSUE-35 with the understanding that this issue is settled in our latest published version of BLD.